Firstly they’re your eyes so only you can put a value on them
Secondly only you can decide on the ‘morality’ of replica sunglasses

I purchased a set of glasses that look very similar to a well known manufacturers

Original intention was for a frame purchase but these came with lenses.

On arrival I’m very pleased by the construction, equally as solid and robust as my genuine product.

Remembering the lens displayed in the shops with shotgun impacts on the lens I thought I’d try my own experiment.

Test one-
Shatter test – I flexed the lens across its weakest (nose) and strongest (main lens) areas to test flexibility, the lens flexed and then folded in both cases- no shatter.

Test two-
Impact test – I attatched the lens to a piece of wood and shot it with my .22 b.s.a air rifle from 10metres. – no penetration and only dimples to show impacts.

Conclusion, I’m happy to wear these without fear of eye penetration death from angry baby robin attack.

But what sort of UV protection do they give? My understanding of cheap/fake sunglasses is that’s where they’re not as good as the genuine items.

More uv than wearing no sunglasses at a guess.

But what sort of UV protection do they give? My understanding of cheap/fake sunglasses is that’s where they’re not as good as the genuine items.

Someone from here did some tests. It’s harder to make a sunglasses lens not UV blocking.

Conclusion, I’m happy to wear these without fear of eye penetration death from angry baby robin attack.

Shame the lenses are now borked.

What’s the legal situation re these?

If I can get a legit, tested, comparable quality lens cheaper than Oakley, I’d be interested.

But what sort of UV protection do they give? My understanding of cheap/fake sunglasses is that’s where they’re not as good as the genuine items.
Someone from here did some tests. It’s harder to make a sunglasses lens not UV blocking.

Your basic clear safety specs for £2 offer sufficient UV protection. Assuming these are made of polycarbonate (and I see no reason why they wouldn’t be as it is the standard cheap material) they will be fine.

Most of the price of Oakley’s is marketing and profit. It is up to you whether you think it is worth paying more for them over cheaper options. I don’t think buying fakes is good though. If you want cheap get some bolle safety glasses don’t rip off someone’s business.

£2 fakelys and £200 oakleys are both made of polycarbonate. This is inherently UV blocking (if I could properly remember my 20+yr old material undergrad I’d tell you why, think its to do with the cross linking).

And if theyre of a similar thickness theyll have similar shotgun pellet/air gun/baby robin penetration resistance.

With Oakley your paying for marketing, sport sponsorship, customer service/support, finish etc- Ive used cheaper glasses with awful optics that made me feel 50 feet of the ground even if they did absorb UV.

Can we conduct tests with guns and shooting you in the face just to be sure

Rusty Spanner – Member
What’s the legal situation re these?

If I can get a legit, tested, comparable quality lens cheaper than Oakley, I’d be interested.
If it’s a copy/fake then it’s illegal to import and you can be fined and have the goods confiscated for importing counterfeit goods. It’s IP theft. There are plenty of good quality independently tested safety glasses that you can get that do the job but don’t pretend to look like Oakleys

As mentioned above, not interested in fakes.

So there are no licenced replacement lenses at all?

I’d read of a US company on a previous thread that appeared to be legit.
I think CTM has mentioned them above.
I’ll have to go back and have another read.

Ta.

More uv than wearing no sunglasses at a guess.

The scare-mongering tactic is to state that cheap sunglasses may block out visible spectrum light and thus cause pupil dilatation. Potentially if the sunglasses allowed UV light through then the same amount of UV light would be hitting a larger pupil and could cause more damage.

I’m not a materials scientist, but I wonder both how/why anyone could/should manufacture sunglasses that selectively filter out visible-spectrum light whilst allowing UV through. I saw a recent magazine article where they tested a load of cheap sunglasses (inc pound-shop items) and found that the UV protection was perfectly fine. They didn’t test the Fauxkleys but I see no reason why they would be different.

I think we need the shotgun test, send them over 😉

The scare-mongering tactic is to state that cheap sunglasses may block out visible spectrum light and thus cause pupil dilatation. Potentially if the sunglasses allowed UV light through then the same amount of UV light would be hitting a larger pupil and could cause more damage.

Over here in Oz the Cancer Council do cheap and very effective sunglasses as it’s important. They don’t pretend to be fashion labels but make tidy decent glasses. Cheap isn’t bad imitation is just poor form.

I knew this post would have controversial elements to it.

The fact is I feel no guilt buying Oreally glasses after Oakley royally stuffed me twice previously, safety specs normally don’t have replaceable lens, I use a good pair at work but wouldn’t want to ride in them and for what it’s worth this style of frame fits well around helmet adjuster bands etc.

And don’t worry I’ve got 3 other lenses to use, bronze, gold type and a smoked clear type.

Perhaps if Oakley hadn’t refused to repair or sell me a hinge for a 2 week old pair of splitjackets instead only offering a new frame at near to retail I might have felt differently.

UV protection could possibly be a concern in some countries. In the UK, riding mountain bikes in the rain in a forest? Not too worried ta.

My £3.99 Decathlon glasses are fully UV tested and rated but it wasn’t a consideration when I bought them, my cheap polycarb safety glasses aren’t UV rated but they will be UV protective. (my house walls aren’t UV rated either)

Rusty, I found them in the flak jacket thread so you better check there quick before all mention is deleted for “promoting fake goods”. Someone is equating aftermarket with counterfeit…

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/dx-sunglasses-uv400-testing-results

Revant optics and Fuse both make after market lenses to fit various Oakley and other manufacturers frames.I’ve bought from both and would do so again.

UV protection could possibly be a concern in some countries. In the UK, riding mountain bikes in the rain in a forest? Not too worried ta.

You should try riding when it’s sunny too then not just when it’s raining.

Friend of mine was after some snow goggles. Only Oakley lenses allowed him to see contour lines on OS maps by headtorch light. Just saying.

I am assuming these lenses are in the style of Radar lenses, do they fit genuine Radar frames?

I like Oakleys. They fit nice, have some great styles, and the choice and quality of lense is fantastic.

I also some cheap sunnies and safety glasses that are decent but just aren’t as clear distortion free as my Oakleys.

I’m happy to pay the premium, but I’m there will be cheaper ones that are similar. I just haven’t found them yet.